[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: Security Audit Request for Screenlocker Branch
From:       Thomas =?UTF-8?B?TMO8Ymtpbmc=?= <thomas.luebking () gmail ! com>
Date:       2011-10-12 19:09:28
Message-ID: 20111012210928.7b7fafc1 () gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Am Wed, 12 Oct 2011 09:10:40 +0200
schrieb Oswald Buddenhagen <ossi@kde.org>:
> that's not a response to my question. the old lock engine offers the
> option to start a saver which only after a few seconds requires a
> password to make it go away.
I think it was, because the idea is that the locker, unlike today
savers, does not start automatically. The screen is just turned off to
save it.

That might however be shortsighted, since it *could* be required to
cover "stupid" users who just walk away and forget to lock their screen
while they actually should.

> it's not so much about the number of dependencies, but the number of
> code path exercised.
I think Martin mainly thought about OpenGL deps and their current
shape :-(

> > * screen is not correctly blanked
> i'm not sure what you mean, but i suppose the above reply applies
> here, too.
screensavers + opengl + msaa + hacks which don't call glClear() -
sad story.

Cheers,
Thomas
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]